Ramblings of a Digital Product Geekhttps://bradbacon.wordpress.com
Tue, 26 Sep 2017 21:46:08 +0000enhourly1http://wordpress.com/https://s2.wp.com/i/buttonw-com.pngRamblings of a Digital Product Geekhttps://bradbacon.wordpress.com
Microsoft did something right: Outlook for iPhonehttps://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2015/04/03/microsoft-did-something-right-outlook-for-iphone/
https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2015/04/03/microsoft-did-something-right-outlook-for-iphone/#respondFri, 03 Apr 2015 22:34:26 +0000http://bradbacon.wordpress.com/?p=35]]>I have been frequently underwhelmed with Microsoft of late. I will say, the latest family of Surface devices look promising and the Hololens is amazing. But the recent innovation I’m most excited about from Microsoft is a little app called Outlook for iPhone. Wow, I feel so old.

Now – if you’re like me, you’ve been in digital orgs a while and are accustomed to using Exchange as a corporate email system. If you’re like me, you’ve also wondered why it can’t be as good as Gmail (that’s another story). If, like me, you are chained to your email away from work and need it to work flawlessly on mobile, Outlook for iPhone will make your day (and weekend).

I will keep this simple. There are really four things I dig the most:

1) The “Focused” inbox: the Outlook app will place email that is from your corporate domain into a “Focused” inbox (there is also an “Other”). At a glance you will see the most important emails, and you can move items from “Other” into “Focused” and if you want, create a rule as you move it so that email from that sender will always land there in the future.

2) Calendar ALWAYS synchs: enough said. It doesn’t always synch on the iPhone Calendar app. It needs to. This is very, very important stuff.

3) Thread management: email conversations are handled as threads, with the logic I expect (again, better than the iPhone Mail app).

4) Attachment management is intuitive and spot-on.

This may not be the most interesting post you’ve ever read, but you’ll be glad you read it. Trust me.

]]>https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2015/04/03/microsoft-did-something-right-outlook-for-iphone/feed/0icon175x175sirbradalotDo doctors even WANT your data?https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/do-doctors-even-want-your-data/
https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/do-doctors-even-want-your-data/#commentsWed, 25 Mar 2015 12:36:27 +0000http://bradbacon.wordpress.com/?p=30]]>SXSW was a blast this year. As expected, a good blend of fun, learning, and exposure to real forward-thinking technologists which makes the experience better than any other conference going.

This year, I was very intrigued by the increased interest and conversation around health/wellness and medtech, especially regarding wearables and the copious personalized data they record and produce. How will this data play into personalized care models and potentially disrupt the patient/doctor dynamic?

The net/net? Don’t hold your breath. (Seriously: don’t, it can be hazardous to your health). While there is value in the data that various wearables are producing, doctors at this point generally just don’t want it.

Why you ask? The primary reasons fall into three categories:

1) Uncertainty about the accuracy of the measurements

The myriad devices on the market (and soon to emerge) use a variety of sensors and methods to measure the various dat points. For example, the Basis watch uses light to measure heart rate directly from the watch, other devices utilize chest straps. I’m not saying which is better, simply that the different methodologies and algorithms aren’t as reliable in the eyes of a doc as the trusty machines he has used in his office for years.

2) Too much data / confusing data

Doctors do not have the time to pile through mounds of data. Docs need a quick view, to spot trends quickly/easily and to jump to anomalies. Also, docs don’t want to learn about “Fuel Points” – for there to be success here, the currency will need to be well established measurements, not trendy “points” and such.

3) Doctors don’t want to incur new potential liability

This one is interesting to me: doctors don’t want to take on the additional liability of dealing with (or failing to deal with) your newfound trove of data. If you hand the doctor a stack of data which contains a buried nugget of concern, you have placed the liability to deal with that into the doctor’s (sometimes) unwilling hands. Again, I’m not making judgements here, just pointing out another of the hurdles.

So – on the flip-side of this coin is great opportunity for entrepreneurs to do what they do best, solve real problems. In a future post I want to address this very issue, and why it is so difficult to get this innovation cranking in Healthcare.

Your thoughts and opinions are more than welcome.

]]>https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/do-doctors-even-want-your-data/feed/2medicare-frustrated-doctorsirbradalotI freaking love my Pebblehttps://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/i-freaking-love-my-pebble/
https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/i-freaking-love-my-pebble/#respondTue, 11 Nov 2014 13:46:16 +0000http://bradbacon.wordpress.com/?p=25]]>I bought a Pebble back in mid-2013. I was excited about the potential for what the Pebble could do, and the Kickstarter roots and general vibe of the company appealed to my Geeky side. So, I dropped $149 and bought one.

I dug the look and feel – but the digging stopped right about there. I owned an iPhone 5 at the time, and the Pebble didn’t sync consistently (you can Google “Pebble Finger Dance” for more info). Long story short, the technology created a tenuous connection where many notifications didn’t sync between the phone and watch without resetting. First-world pain and agony.

Fast forward: Sep 2014, Apple announces the Apple Watch. At the same time, Pebble announces background fitness and sleep tracking on the Pebble and drops the price to $99. Also since I last owned, they’ve added Bluetooth 4 support (BLE) and added an app store. I decided to grab one – and am VERY glad that I did.

A day in the life

I wake up to the buzzing of my Pebble alarm on my wrist – my wife is glad it isn’t my iPhone buzzing on the table and waking her as well. I take a peek at my sleep pattern on the Misfit app on my Pebble (not enough sleep, even though the Pebble’s “do not disturb” function ensured I didn’t receive notifications during the night). I take a peek at my default watch face (The Weather Channel) to check current temp, quick flick of the wrist and I get the 3-day forecast. Shower with Pebble on – its waterproof.

I get in the car to head to work and remove my Pebble to charge with the simple magnetic charger during the commute (battery goes 5-6 days between charges). This way, I don’t miss any of my activity tracking while the watch is charging. Into my meetings, and the Pebble reliably keeps my on top of incoming emails, phone calls, and texts and alerts me to upcoming events on my cal. Since I use a headset with my iPhone in my pocket for calls, I’m able to take (or reject) incoming calls with the press of a button on my watch and leave my iPhone in my pocket.

Swing my the store on the way home, listening to some jams on Spotify and I can scroll through tracks and start/stop from my Pebble. I pull up the grocery list on my watch via the Evernote app and can check off the items as I find them – my phone stays in my pocket. Add reliable/simple GPS, some pretty cool games (Flappy Bird port and Asteroids are my fave), ESPN sports scores, and a simple Yelp app (to name a few) and you’ve got a well-rounded, useful, thoughtful device that has become a pretty indispensable part of my day.

What do you think? Do you own a smartwatch? Like it? Why? I can see myself getting an Apple Watch one day, but don’t see a +$250 increase in value over what my reliable, waterproof Pebble can do.

]]>https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/i-freaking-love-my-pebble/feed/0Pebble_watch_trio_group_04sirbradalotThe Apple Event sorta sucked…so what?https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/the-apple-event-sorta-sucked-so-what/
https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/the-apple-event-sorta-sucked-so-what/#respondWed, 10 Sep 2014 14:05:16 +0000http://bradbacon.wordpress.com/?p=22]]>One thing Apple does incredibly well is market – creating a tremendous sense of anticipation for their launch events. And when the hype is at a fever-pitch, the stakes are high to deliver. Yesterday’s event was a disappointment, leaving many unable to watch the live stream AND underwhelming us with a barrage of “me, too” products. So what? These products are not earth-shattering but are o’plenty to keep Apple on their trajectory as the top-shelf digital product company of our age.

Briefly, the issues with the stream: really bad. From the continual drops/resets, the “rainbow screen of death,” the Cinese translator voice-over…at least it created great Twitter fodder.

Apple Branding: Interesting…no “iWatch” or “iPay,” rather we get “Apple Watch” and “Apple Pay.” Getting away from naming everything “i” is probably smart, although it might hint at a perceived need to underscore the Apple brand. In either case: applaud, good move.

Phones: I will admit, my most likely next phone will be the iPhone6. It looks like a winner. Since the 6 Plus (likely) won’t fit in my pocket, I’m unlikely to fork out the extra dough for that one. Plus (pun intended), I already have an iPad. Not sure I see the brilliance in the phablet strategy from Apple – sorta nullifies the use case for the iPad Mini, doesn’t it? Mostly “me, too” in the phone category, catching up with Samsung and others.

Apple Pay: Smart. Makes a TON of sense, highly anticipated and expected entry for Apple into the burgeoning mobile payments space. However, as Business Insider observes, Apple is rolling with a safe (smart) strategy to start here, working closely with the credit card companies and banks vs. going the direct route (ala PayPal). I can see the smarts here – stick with what you do best and how you can enable and improve your portion of the value chain. On the flip-side, seen in context with the bold moves of Apple in the past this feels like a defensive maneuver.

Lastly, the Apple Watch. Looks a little too much like the Samsung Galaxy Gear. However, some of the UI features that were demonstrated show that Apple put thought and care into the experience to get it “right.” Whether you agree with VentureBeat – Apple Watch is ugly and boring (and Steve Jobs would have agreed) – or you like the design, there is no doubt that Apple’s entrance into this space will EXPAND wearables to a much larger category in 2015 and beyond. And remember the their first gen iPod (pictured above) – we will look back on this first Apple Watch with the same nostalgia as the company pushes the design ahead in the coming years.

What do you think? Will these launches cement Tim Cook as a capable visionary? Will Apple stay on their rockstar trajectory?

]]>https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/the-apple-event-sorta-sucked-so-what/feed/0ipodsirbradalotBorn and raised surrounded by screenshttps://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/born-and-raised-surrounded-by-screens-2/
https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/born-and-raised-surrounded-by-screens-2/#respondMon, 04 Aug 2014 13:53:35 +0000http://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/born-and-raised-surrounded-by-screens-2/]]>My amazing wife and I have three beautiful, creative, messy kids. Our son is (GASP) 17, middle daughter 15, and baby girl is 5. I find it incredibly interesting to observe (from a socio-digital experience perspective) how the technology surrounding them has shaped their personalities and behaviors. You know, the screens…

When our oldest (Devin) was born in 1997, we didn’t yet have a computer in the home. As newlyweds, we were pinching pennies and my first real job wasn’t exactly flooding us with income. When we moved into our second home in Atlanta in 1999, I received a raise and was able to have work pay for an ISDN line to our home. ISDN was a very early “high-speed” Internet solution to the home, really only about 2-3X the speed of dial-up (main benefit was no “dial-beep-beep-boop-KERRR-KERRR-KERRR”). We had a computer always on the Internet at that point, and Devin began to interact with it quite a bit.

By the time our daughter Dylan was old enough to notice in 2000, I had my first laptop in the home and have never turned back. She was accustomed from the get-go to having the screen in her lap (or mommie’s lap), not just tethered to the wall connected to a big, heavy monitor. This made her interactions much more frequent and longer.

With our youngest, born in 2009, she had an iPad in her hands as soon as she could hold it (before the age of one). Judge if you’d like – Sarah Kate is incredibly bright and was reading before she turned three, some of which I credit to her daily use of the iPad and the plethora of educational apps. She assumes all screens can be touched and should be smart. She has never ONCE asked for help accomplishing a task on the iPad, iPhone, any device. She took to my Macbook like *that* (snaps fingers) and has no problem interfacing with the keyboard or trackpad, opening new windows, or any other tasks.

It is fascinating to see how these kids expectations are set by the technology they are born into. I heard a quote a few months back at a conference: “kids born today will probably never learn to drive a car the way we think of driving a car.” Wow. How have your kids reacted to the shifts in technology through their childhoods?

]]>https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/born-and-raised-surrounded-by-screens-2/feed/0002-eTrade-baby-with-iPadsirbradalotWhat wearables will YOU be willing to wear?https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/07/31/what-wearables-will-you-be-willing-to-wear/
https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/07/31/what-wearables-will-you-be-willing-to-wear/#respondThu, 31 Jul 2014 03:23:02 +0000http://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/07/31/what-wearables-will-you-be-willing-to-wear/]]>I am super-jazzed to be working in the digital health space. There are so many amazing advancements right around the corner in a space that has been slow, but is gaining momentum and learning to leverage technology in new and exciting ways.

One of the most promising areas of digital health (and wellness) is wearable technology and the QS (Quantified Self) movement. We’ve all seen the vast array of wearable devices that are beginning to crowd the market and mindshare: from watches and wristbands to glasses, contacts, shoes, even bras. These devices are already very helpful to many trying to get and stay fit. The promise of what this technology will bring in the future is astounding: Imagine a heart attack victim being alerted on his phone BEFORE the attack that the ambulance is on the way…your doctor having a running record of your vitals since your last visit…an alert on your phone when your daughter’s blood sugar is too high…

Now here is the question: which of these wearables are you willing to wear? Willing to be a Glasshole? Will you forgo your fashionable watch for a black plastic strap and plain glass screen? Will you wear these shoes? The lady in the picture above is wearing technology that is valuable, but a little less than attractive…or practical.

When does the QS movement become as mainstream as the smartphone? When it is useful, simple and indispensable. When it is literally in the fabric of our clothes, embedded in our contacts. As the technology blends seamlessly into the forms and norms of our lives and invisibly interacts with the screens that surround us (and the databases that track us, in the cloud that surrounds us), the technology will gain scale. The solutions that will be mind-boggling and life-changing: even life-saving. This will require moving design beyond the toilet-roll hat. I’m looking forward to watching this space take shape.

If you ever visit sites on the web (from any given device), you’ve seen retargeted ads (unless you’re the rare creature who knows how to move invisibly through the Interwebs). For me, being in the industry means I WANT to see the latest/greatest/most invasive ad technology out there. For better or worse, you must know what is in the market and how it will impact the space. This technology has been around for years, but is gaining prevalence and crossing into new categories.

In a nutshell, here is how personalized retargeting works: you visit advertiser A’s site and peruse products 1, 2 and 3 (maybe even throwing them in a shopping cart). You later leave the site and visit another entirely unrelated site, only to see an ad from advertiser A that includes images and links to products 1, 2 and 3. The first few times you saw this you were shocked – now it is a multiple times per day occurrence. MAGIC! Not really…actually, the advertiser and publisher are colluding to track you and target your innermost feelings. You would have to be living under a rock to have missed some of the debate regarding privacy, tracking, cookies…this may or may not freak you out. It obviously freaks Rockwell out, and probably the lead singer for Men At Work (“Who can it be now??)

As a consumer, I must say the following: personalized retargeting doesn’t bother me (yet). Seeing ads for things I’m ACTUALLY interested in buying rather than random who-knows-what is in some ways less annoying/invasive. In fact, in some iterations I look at those ads as my own “portable shopping cart” endlessly reminding me that I love watches (and these ads HAVE driven me back to purchase: guilty). On the other hand, for some categories this tactic can be annoying or even disturbing. For example, if you broke up with an ex weeks ago and are continually reminded of the painful breakup by seeing the Vermont Teddy Bear you almost bought her in the ad slot as you surf the web (if ONLY i’d bought the bear!) More tipping the line – retargeting based on consumption of more “sensitive” content (healthcare, debt relief, etc).

So – what do you think? Creepy? Effective? Both? Any examples that stood out to you lately?

]]>https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/07/24/personalized-ad-retargeting-creepy-or-effective-or-both/feed/3singer-rockwell-michael-jacsirbradalotSurvey-based research vs. behavioral: which is better?https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/07/21/survey-based-research-vs-behavioral-which-is-better/
https://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/07/21/survey-based-research-vs-behavioral-which-is-better/#commentsMon, 21 Jul 2014 17:48:13 +0000http://bradbacon.wordpress.com/2014/07/21/survey-based-research-vs-behavioral-which-is-better/]]>At a recent conference I attended (Panagora MobileBiz Tech), there were (as usual) several deep-dive research presentations from reputable research firms. The research was (as usual) alternately exciting/boring/enlightening, with no less than a half-dozen different spins on the emerging prevalence of mobile devices. I was able to glean some great data points and apply a more objective lens to support/refute some of my current thinking on “what’s next” in our product roadmap.

What was most interesting, however, was a “counter-current” of commentary related to the trustworthiness of traditional, survey-based research data. More than one speaker directly challenged drawing any conclusions from research gathered through traditional surveys. Counter-survey-research-rebel Philip Graves, author of Consumerology, essentially refuted the idea that survey-based research is a valid way to learn what consumers want because it is intrinsically biased. Context and modality (when was the survey delivered? Where? Time of day/week/month? Screen?) all directly influence the results. Also, people will instinctively tend to answer from the perspective of the person they WANT to be rather than the person they are. Philip argued strongly that “behavior is the ONLY metric that matters.” Of course, Philips approach raised the ire of the traditional research folks in the room, whose livelihoods depend on this model of survey/report/repeat.

I liked what Philip had to say, and also tend to look suspiciously at data gathered via direct survey. However, I prefer to think of research data and behavioral data as two sides of the same coin. My analogy of choice is a patient in the hospital. There are two primary ways we know how the patient is doing: 1) metrics and 2) “survey” data. The metrics are gleaned from the tubes and such sticking on and into the patient that report a myriad of real-time data points (heart rate, BP, body temp, respiratory rate) and are tracked closely by hospital personnel. The “survey” data is gathered by asking the patient questions: “Where does it hurt? Did you sleep well? Have you been eating well? Taking your meds?” So I ask you now: which of these types of data are important and which one isn’t? It is the same for measuring the health of your product/business/idea/marketing results: you need both sides of the coin to tell a complete story and draw the most reliable conclusions.

Where do you fall in this argument: survey-based data vs. behavioral? Which is more important to you and why?

For those in the digital media space, this quote might be altered to “with great functionality comes great expectations.” Digital advertising is very powerful and flexible, providing amazing abilities to target and track the display, interaction, and downstream actions from virtually any placement on any platform. These amazing capabilities drive high expectations from advertisers. The latest trend in this category is viewability.

Wikipedia defines a Viewable Impression as “a metric of ads which were actually viewable when served (in part, entirely or based on other conditional parameters)”. Viewable impressions are a key component of the 3MS (Making Measurement Make Sense), an industry-wide initiative of the IAB, ANA, and 4A’s (managed by MRC). In a nutshell, it is a way to measure whether a digital ad was actually seen by a human being. On the surface, this type of measurability makes a lot of sense and takes the digital advertising space to a new level of insight and value to advertisers. However, there are some lurking concerns.

For starters: as ad viewability emerges as a standard, publishers will be incentivized to make certain more ads appear for a longer time in a consumer’s digital view. This could lead to publishers compromising the user experience for the sake of monetization – for example, interstitials and overlay ads running amok. It will be a challenge and balancing act for publishers to maintain great UX while delivering the ad results necessary to grow the business (impressions, CTR, viewability, Action Rate…)

It is also interesting to note how more “traditional” advertising that doesn’t have the functional capabilities of digital get to skate on…for example, what is the “Action Rate” from your latest billboard campaign? Print advertising? TV? Systems that purport to measure these are nowhere near as reliable as digital, so these platforms can maintain $ rates without fear of increased performance demands. Digital cannot. Fair? I think not.

It will be interesting to see how this unfolds and impacts digital media across screens. Thoughts?